Talk:Moral Maze: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 14:16, 2 June 2022

Please add {{WikiProject banner shell}} to this page and add the quality rating to that template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

BBC Stub‑class Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject BBC, an attempt to better organise information in articles related to the BBC. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page where you can join us as a member. You can also visit the BBC Portal.BBCWikipedia:WikiProject BBCTemplate:WikiProject BBCBBC articles

Stub

This article has been rated as Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Tasks for WikiProject BBC:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests : Improve BBC, BBC News (TV channel) and BBC News to Good Article status following previous reviews, create BBC Computer Literacy Project (in light of forthcoming 30th anniversary)
Cleanup : Chucklevision - references and general clean-up, Pebble Mill Studios - over-detailed and long, BBC World Service Television - unreferenced and confusing
Copyedit : BBC News, Broadcasting House
Expand : Top 20 start-class BBC articles with most importance: BBC Japan, BBC World Service Television, BBC Lifestyle, BBC Two Northern Ireland
NPOV : Criticism of the BBC (See comments)
Stubs : Stub-Class BBC articles
Other : *Restructure the category
- Add infoboxes to the BBC articles without infoboxes
- Add free-use images to biographical articles where possible
- Add references to Goa Mix (see assessment) and Coat of arms of the BBC
- Return Dad's Army to a Good article. (See comments)
- Reassess BBC following improvements to article.

Please add {{WikiProject banner shell}} to this page and add the quality rating to that template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Radio: UK Start‑class Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Radio, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Radio-related subjects on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.RadioWikipedia:WikiProject RadioTemplate:WikiProject RadioRadio articles

Start

This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

This page is within the scope of the UK Radio taskforce. New members are always welcome!

To-do List:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests : Create: Missing years and articles in radio, National Association of Radio Distress-Signalling and Infocommunications (Hungary)
Assess : Unassessed Radio articles; Unknown-importance Radio articles
Cleanup : Radio articles needing attention
Expand : Midweek Politics Bob Crane
Maintain : Portal:Radio
Stubs : Expand: Radio stubs
Verify : Unreferenced BLPs
Other : Collaboration of the Week:
Requests for Radio peer review:

I'm not sure if the the criticism section is really relevant to this article. It sounds a bit partisan to me. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.139.105.123 (talk) 21:22, 23 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. I've taken this out as it is not sourced or evidenced "It has also attracted criticism for not properly detailing the politics and sympathies of its panellists, for instance in presenting Melanie Phillips simply as a journalist and not as an advocate of the Israeli hard right." What criticism? Where/ when? Melanie Phillips politics viz. Israel would surely only be relevant in that context? How would it bear on any other debate unless there were clear and reasonable parrallel? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.8.120.133 (talk) 15:06, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

While I agree re the Israel point, I see the criticism by Jamie Whyte was also deleted for no good reason as it was sourced, so I have reinstated it.Ben Finn (talk) 22:09, 4 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

"Structure"

This section is nonsense to this listener. The programme is not based on Select committee procedures who at least pretend they might be open to reason.

The 'witnesses' are not 'relentlessly' grilled - they are told they are talking nonsense by 'panellists' who are not seeking light but merely trying to have have their preconceptions on air, if not endorsed.

I agree it is compelling radio, as a car crash is compelling. I had a bet on how soon 'utilitarian' could be introduced in the programme...I won this week as Buerk used it in his bumbling introduction. How can someone, given a week's warning, produce so many 'umm's', 'errs' and pauses in a prepared script.

This article needs some proper editing by a disinterested person

Cannonmc (talk) 15:16, 18 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with the deletion you made. I reckon the article reads fine now, so I've removed the POV tag. Ben Finn (talk) 22:12, 4 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Michael Portillo

was a fomer frequent panellist.

Stub Class BBC

Why is this article rated stub class by WikiProject BBC? It seems too long to be stub class article to me. Vorbee (talk) 16:15, 6 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Michael Buerk as a wikilink

Michael Buerk's name appears as a wikilink in the infobox in the top right-hand corner, but I wonder whether his name should appear as a wikilink in the section sub-titled "Structure". After all, not everybody might look at the infobox. Vorbee (talk) 19:10, 20 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 32: / Line 32: @@
 :I agree with the deletion you made. I reckon the article reads fine now, so I've removed the POV tag. [[User:Bfinn|Ben Finn]] ([[User talk:Bfinn|talk]]) 22:12, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
-==Michael Portillo=
+==Michael Portillo==
 was a fomer frequent panellist.